Code Review

Code review using 3 parallel subagents. Scope detected automatically.

Workflow

•Detect scope (see below)
•Launch 3 parallel reviewer subagents
•Aggregate findings by severity, deduplicate
•Report summary with actionable items

Scope Detection

bash

# Priority order:
# 1. User provided specific files/paths? -> Review those
# 2. Feature branch? -> diff vs main
# 3. Upstream remote? -> diff vs upstream/main
# 4. Version tags? -> diff vs last tag
# 5. Unpushed commits? -> diff vs origin/main
# 6. Staged changes? -> git diff --cached
# 7. Unstaged changes? -> git diff
# 8. Nothing -> inform user

Parallel Subagents

Launch all 3 in parallel using Task tool with subagent_type: reviewer:

Agent 1: Correctness

Logic and functional correctness.

•Logic errors, off-by-one, boundary conditions
•Null/undefined handling
•State consistency (partial failures)
•Race conditions (if concurrent)
•Edge cases: empty, max, negative, zero
•Control flow correctness
•Algorithm correctness

Agent 2: Safety

Security and error handling (defensive thinking).

•Input validation at boundaries
•Hardcoded secrets, credentials
•Injection: SQL, XSS, command, path traversal
•Auth/authz checks
•Sensitive data in logs
•Silent failures, empty catch blocks
•Error propagation (swallowed vs bubbled)
•Fallback behavior hiding problems
•Resource cleanup on error

Agent 3: Quality

Design, performance, and idioms.

•Fits existing patterns?
•Single responsibility
•Over-engineering (future problems?)
•Code smells: long functions (>40 lines), large files (>400 lines)
•Dead code, unused variables
•Naming: intention-revealing, proportional to scope
•No _v2, _new suffixes
•Unnecessary allocations (String vs &str, Vec vs &[T])
•O(n²) where O(n) possible
•Blocking I/O in async, N+1 queries
•Language idioms (Rust/Python/Go/TS)

Subagent Prompt

code

Review code changes for [FOCUS: Correctness | Safety | Quality].

Scope: [diff or files]

Report issues with confidence >= 80%. Format:

[SEVERITY] file:line - Issue
  -> Fix

Severities:
- ERROR: Must fix (bugs, security, silent failures)
- WARN: Should fix (smells, performance)
- NIT: Optional (style, minor)

Be thorough. No false positives. Only flag what you're confident about.

Aggregation

•Deduplicate (same issue from multiple agents = 1 issue)
•Sort: ERROR → WARN → NIT
•Group by file

Output Format

code

## Review Summary

Scope: [X files, Y lines]
Issues: ERROR: X, WARN: X, NIT: X

## Critical (must fix)

[ERROR] file:line - Issue
  -> Fix

## Important (should fix)

[WARN] file:line - Issue
  -> Fix

## Minor

[NIT] file:line - Issue
  -> Fix

## Strengths

- What's done well

## Verdict

LGTM / LGTM with nits / Needs work

Quick Review (small changes)

For < 50 lines, review directly without subagents: